baggage "templates"
Aug 28, 2002 | 2:06 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 242
baggage "templates"
Does anyone know if there are still those "baggage templates" on the x-ray machines in Terminals A and B at EWR? I always go through Terminal C where there aren't any.
I'm trying to plan my packing to encounter the least amount of hassle. I know CO was challenging these templates a while back but I don't know if anything ever came of it.
I'm trying to plan my packing to encounter the least amount of hassle. I know CO was challenging these templates a while back but I don't know if anything ever came of it.
Aug 28, 2002 | 2:10 pm
#2
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: DTW
Programs: Choice Plat, Marriott Lifetime Gold, National Exec Elite, Spirit Gold
Posts: 3,135
I thought UA threw in the towel on the templates? Might be mistaken, but I think I remember reading that...
Aug 28, 2002 | 2:31 pm
#3
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Cleveland, OH USA
Posts: 453
The last time I flew out of A (1-2 months ago) the templates wreer not there.
Aug 28, 2002 | 2:34 pm
#4
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: northern NJ, CO Silver
Programs: Lifetime PC Member
Posts: 344
Terminal A - CO Concourse A2 - No Templates
Aug 28, 2002 | 2:59 pm
#5
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 242
Cool, thanks! I guess I can pack my normal carry-on now.
Aug 28, 2002 | 4:33 pm
#6
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: new york, ny, usa
Posts: 13,536
that was CO's big claim to fame--no templates. in fact, didn't they sue another airline (i think delta or united) because they shared terminals and CO didn't want the template but the other airline put them in?
Aug 28, 2002 | 4:52 pm
#7
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Programs: UA 1K, HH Diamond, MR Silver
Posts: 228
It was UA.
By-the-way, there is a WSJ article in today's issue about airlines enforcing bag size rules and charging big time for overages. This is linear dimension violations -- even if the bag meets weight requirements. The article points out that its another revenue source for the airlines.
Ironically, the only time I was ever charged for excess baggage was on CO out of EWR.
By-the-way, there is a WSJ article in today's issue about airlines enforcing bag size rules and charging big time for overages. This is linear dimension violations -- even if the bag meets weight requirements. The article points out that its another revenue source for the airlines.
Ironically, the only time I was ever charged for excess baggage was on CO out of EWR.
Aug 28, 2002 | 5:48 pm
#8
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 242
fly co: that's exactly what I was thinking about. I'm pretty sure the lawsuit had to do with DCA or IAD or somewhere other than EWR.
Aug 28, 2002 | 11:37 pm
#9
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: fort worth, tx AA Gold,Best Western-Diamond, HH- Gold, Marriott-Silver
Posts: 2,737
Hit the wrong button, and duped the first part.
[This message has been edited by wldtrvlr (edited 08-28-2002).]
[This message has been edited by wldtrvlr (edited 08-28-2002).]
Aug 28, 2002 | 11:40 pm
#10
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: fort worth, tx AA Gold,Best Western-Diamond, HH- Gold, Marriott-Silver
Posts: 2,737
[QUOTE]Originally posted by wldtrvlr:
[B]It was IAD and CO sued UAL over it. UAL has a hub there, hence, they controlled the checkpoints. CO added larger overhead bins, but the customers could not get the "bigger" bags through Uniteds checkpoints. I think it was a blanket case though and the templets had to come off at all airports. I believe the ruling was something to the effect that one airline could not dictate to another the size of passenger carry ons.
Back then (I think it was several years ago) Continentals arguement was that their customers wanted more space on board for carry ons, they fullfilled the request by putting in bigger bins on older planes and getting bigger bins on newer planes. They felt that if the customers wanted it and they provided it that UA should not be able to stop their customers from "partaking of a "good" enhancement". The courts agreed. To bad CO has gone the other way with enhancements!
[This message has been edited by wldtrvlr (edited 08-28-2002).]
[B]It was IAD and CO sued UAL over it. UAL has a hub there, hence, they controlled the checkpoints. CO added larger overhead bins, but the customers could not get the "bigger" bags through Uniteds checkpoints. I think it was a blanket case though and the templets had to come off at all airports. I believe the ruling was something to the effect that one airline could not dictate to another the size of passenger carry ons.
Back then (I think it was several years ago) Continentals arguement was that their customers wanted more space on board for carry ons, they fullfilled the request by putting in bigger bins on older planes and getting bigger bins on newer planes. They felt that if the customers wanted it and they provided it that UA should not be able to stop their customers from "partaking of a "good" enhancement". The courts agreed. To bad CO has gone the other way with enhancements!
[This message has been edited by wldtrvlr (edited 08-28-2002).]
Aug 29, 2002 | 10:28 am
#11
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chesapeake, VA USA
Programs: Delta Platinum Medallion, Marriott Bonvoy Titanium
Posts: 516
Actually it was the TSA that put the final nail in the coffin for baggage templates.
Back in May, the TSA told airlines to stop using the baggage templates some carriers had installed on X-ray machines in recent years. Most of the templates had been removed after lawsuits or other complaints, but a few airports still had the security checkpoints with the metal or plastic sizing devices.
Back in May, the TSA told airlines to stop using the baggage templates some carriers had installed on X-ray machines in recent years. Most of the templates had been removed after lawsuits or other complaints, but a few airports still had the security checkpoints with the metal or plastic sizing devices.